So, after some confusing texts, I think Edbauer has definitely been much easier to understand. Through her first several pages she starts talking about rhetoric and the motion of rhetoric. She says that "rhetoric is always in a state of flux," which basically means that it's always moving and that the emotions it has can be and are different at all times. This connects with what she says in the next page, "rhetorical situation is part of an ongoing social flux." It's like I said in the last comment: rhetoric is always in motion and is constantly changing due to the rhetorical situation.
So this was more of an elementary connection, but I think it helps with what Edbauer says next...
She then quotes Remy Chauvin who talks about "an apparel evolution of two beings that have absolutely nothing to do with each other." Remy did the study about a cat and a baboon who have nothing in common with each other, but who have "transversal communication with each other through the genealogical tree." I think this is a good study/main point because it shows that by being around each other, i.e. an audience, you can spread emotions and when you push it even further you can even spread a virus type.
The last quote I liked and can ask a question with follows with baboon/cat study: "what is shared (between the cat and baboon) are certain emotions and contagions." So can emotions be shared and felt by being around someone or something for long enough? What do you all think?
In response to your question, I (and, probably Brennan) would say that emotions, undoubtedly, can be shared and felt by being around someone/something for a period of time. It all goes back to our not being entirely affectively "contained." Examples are myriad. In my personal experience, I am incredibly sensitive to the moods of my friends/girlfriend/coworkers etc. I can definitely sense tension in the air, and I feel a marked physiological reaction (becoming tense) whenever this happens. On the flip side, being around happy/relaxed people makes me more relaxed. I once, by circumstance, sat in on a yoga session. I didn't do yoga, but just by virtue of being there I left feeling incredibly at ease. Mirror neutrons at work!
ReplyDeleteLike Gordon, I too think that you can feel and share someone’s emotions. I think that is why we enjoy being around some people more than others. This happens to me a lot at work. Some of my coworkers are always happy and joyous. Their vibe (affect) and positive emotions brighten up my day and make me feel happy. But then I have other coworkers who exhibit a lot of negative emotions. I try to keep distance around these coworkers because I feel that their emotions bounce back on me and make me feel angry/sad/frustrated during my work shift. So whether we like it or not, other’s emotions do have a powerful impact on our mood, emotions, and sometimes even our day!
ReplyDeleteI think it's possible to detect what someone or something's emotions are by being around them a long time if only because you eventually build a frame of reference. Given enough time, you will build a wide array of emotions that are being displayed and shared by the other entity; this is an inevitability as time spent with someone else increases, even if they aren't of the same species and don't cause physical affect a la Brennan. Once this frame of reference is built, it's only natural for you to be able to share and feel what emotions are being had by the other person.
ReplyDeleteIn response to your question, I think Brennan, Massumi, and even Damasio would say that emotions can and must be shared by individuals who are around each other for long enough. I'm inclined to accept this claim too, though I'm not sure I believe in inter-species affect transmission. I find it hard to believe that the happiness of my dog will have an affective effect on me. Between people, however, I know that groups can share emotions.
ReplyDeleteQuestion--if a group spent a long enough time in a room and their original affective states were held constant, could the group achieve a collective affective equilibrium? In other words, could they all end up at the same affective state after a long enough time?